Earlier quoted context omitted.
Well, the population growth probably isn't linear, so maybe?
Warming will kill off most of the systems these animals depend on within 30 years.
[flagged]
Humpback whales are forming super-groups
91–100 of 134 posts
Re: Humpback whales are forming super-groups
#92holy units batman > Bursting from their enormous lungs at over 300mph (483km/h), a humpback whale's blow can rise up to 7m (23ft) into the air. Pick a lane BBC. But this is great news. Also the fact that whales "transport huge amounts of nutrients across the globe" (linking to [1]) is fascinating. The role of whales in sucking up critters in one place and pooping them out elsewhere being a fundamental dynamic that dr…
How we measure things in the UK has been dragged into political debates (Boris floated the idea of forcing supermarkets to list weights in pounds and ounces "again"). So critical thinking or sane decisions are out the window on this front.
Although there is some logic to keeping miles per hour for road speed limits as there is a big cost associated with updating all the signs and associated "documentation".
An organisation like the BBC have to make sure to use imperial measures (as well the one most people actually interact with), otherwise Reform voters have a meltdown.
Re: Humpback whales are forming super-groups
#93Earlier quoted context omitted.
Warming will kill off most of the systems these animals depend on within 30 years.
[flagged]
Because they think it might make people give a shit enough to do something to change that outcome?
Fear is a strong motivator, but it is not a good one in this case. To really be effective, there must be the threat of direct, immediate, and severe consequences.
Instead it causes people to treat their messages as hyperbolic and undermines their entire movement.
Re: Humpback whales are forming super-groups
#94Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why put a number on it? Every number so far has been wrong. Can we agree on the negative impacts of humans on an environment conducive to humanity without putting obviously wrong timings on predictions? I bet your intention is to provoke urgency but to most people it just causes an eye roll because it's not true, whereas the underlying ideas are true.
Very much agree. It's a pretty common mistake to bundle real information with obviously wrong details and lose credibility. Especially in the eyes of people looking for a reason to discredit the argument.
The disingenuous people who discredit climate change will do so no matter how serious people act. There is no point in changing behavior on their account.
Re: Humpback whales are forming super-groups
#95Earlier quoted context omitted.
Warming will kill off most of the systems these animals depend on within 30 years.
[flagged]
> What I'm wondering is why is there such a push for this stuff? Why does someone want everyone to think life as we know it is ending?
Simple thought exercise (it's a 2x2):
What are the consequences of climate change being consequential vs inconsequential?
What are the consequences of us doing too little or too much to mitigate climate change?
Which quadrants are most consequential for the future of our planet?
Re: Humpback whales are forming super-groups
#96Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
> What I'm wondering is why is there such a push for this stuff? Why does someone want everyone to think life as we know it is ending? Simple thought exercise (it's a 2x2): What are the consequences of climate change being consequential vs inconsequential? What are the consequences of us doing too little or too much to mitigate climate change? Which quadrants are most consequential for the future of our planet?
tl;dr is there's very poor ROI to do nothing to improve our polluting habits and banking on the world sorting itself out.
Furthermore, most actions we can take to improve climate outcomes can also improve societal and technological outcomes. The only downside to taking more actions to have clean energy and less pollution are based on made up economic rules that normal people are supposed to follow, but that the super rich/powerful skirt at their leisure. A cleaner future benefits the VAST majority, irrespective of climate change. And the bonus is that if climate change does progress, we're better suited to manage it.
Or we can keep burning liquified dinosaur bones and partying like cigarettes don't cause cancer. I get the appeal of the 60s for how care free people could be - they lived without consequence. And we're stuck dealing with their failed policies.
Re: Humpback whales are forming super-groups
#97Re: Humpback whales are forming super-groups
#98Earlier quoted context omitted.
Warming will kill off most of the systems these animals depend on within 30 years.
Why put a number on it? Every number so far has been wrong. Can we agree on the negative impacts of humans on an environment conducive to humanity without putting obviously wrong timings on predictions? I bet your intention is to provoke urgency but to most people it just causes an eye roll because it's not true, whereas the underlying ideas are true.
because whales can communicate into the thousands of kilometers range and nowadays, because of marine traffic, they are luck to get into the hundred meters
micro-plastics into the ocean don't have a good prognosis on numbers reduction
global warming has a huge effect on oceanic life
and so on. maybe the number is much worse
Re: Humpback whales are forming super-groups
#99Earlier quoted context omitted.
Very much agree. It's a pretty common mistake to bundle real information with obviously wrong details and lose credibility. Especially in the eyes of people looking for a reason to discredit the argument.
The disingenuous people who discredit climate change will do so no matter how serious people act. There is no point in changing behavior on their account.
[deleted]
Re: Humpback whales are forming super-groups
#100Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
Because they think it might make people give a shit enough to do something to change that outcome? Fear is a strong motivator, but it is not a good one in this case. To really be effective, there must be the threat of direct, immediate, and severe consequences. Instead it causes people to treat their messages as hyperbolic and undermines their entire movement.
There also has been, in the past, threat of indirect consequences that would happen in the future and which never came true.